ELLIOTT, A. M., «On a Philological Expedition to Canada», dans

ELLIOTT, A. M., «On a Philological Expedition to Canada», dans The Johns Hopkins University
Circulars, Baltimore (Maryland), vol.4, no 35, déc. 1884, p. 20-21.
D'origine américaine, Elliott (1844-1910) est le fondateur de la Modern Language Association. Ses
travaux l'emmenèrent à s'intéresser à la langue parlée au Canada. Il y vint dans le but d'amasser du
matériel dont il pourrait se servir par la suite pour effectuer une analyse scientifique du langage des
Canadiens. Le passage qui suit est tiré de On a Philological Expedition to Canada, article qui est un
résumé dans lequel Elliott ne fait part que d'une petite partie des faits saillants de son enquête.
Elliott est l'auteur d'articles spécialisés sur le français du Canada qu'il a fait paraître dans American
Journal of Philology.
« {Abstract of a paper read at the meeting of the University Philological Association, October 3,
1884}.1
[...]
In point of language the Canadian French is certainly one of the most interesting topics
for a philologian.
Here we find that time has stood still, especially for the more remote rural
districts, and the scholar could easily imagine himself holding intercourse with the subjects of
Louis XIV.
This means that we have the unique privilege in this age of steam and travel of
studying in them a form of speech that has scarcely known change for the past two centuries. But
this idiom is not a dialect of that remote period, and the greatest surprise to a student of language
arriving in Canada is to find that, contrary to the general impression of scholars, the vernacular
does not bear any specific dialectic character, but is the Middle (sixteenth century) French with
those natural changes which would be produced by the intimate fusion into a whole of all the
different species of language that were originally brought from the mother country.
The
commonest Habitant understands French and the stranger will easily follow him in conversation,
provided he knows the terms and forms of the old language. The next most general characteristic
of this striking type of speech is the colorless uniformity of pronunciation referred to above.
Displacement of accent (Láreau), the sonant character of final consonants, especially the t in
proper names (Nicolet); the imperfect articulation of the r – all these are more or less noticeable
everywhere and are doubtless due to the influence of contact with the English.
The further
general syncopation of emutum, as in j'f'ra, t'nez, v'nez and the extensive application of the «Law
1
Les accolades remplacent ici les crochets qui figurent dans le texte de manière à ce que le lecteur ne confonde pas
ces passages avec n os propres interventions qui se font toujours en crochets.
DOCUMENT 54 : Elliott, On a Philological Expedition to Canada
of Least Action» in strong contractions, such as j'm'a (a in English father) for je m'en vais are
common and make the language, for a short time, rather difficult to be understood by the
uninitiated.
For the Phonetics the most notable deviation from the modern French usage is found in
the variety of sound-shading given to one and the same graphic sign where the Parisian often has
but one or at most two species to offer us. This holds true for the vowel, and more particularly
for the diphtongs; for example, in the oi and eu combinations. In both of these we have three
distinct nuances of sound, namely, for the former, 1, oi = ea in English wear, swear; 2,
oi = French oé (moé); 3, oi = the abnormal modern French wa; for the latter, 1, eu = the ordinary
French phonetic equivalent (German ö); 2, eu = simple French u (German ü); 3, eu = a sound
midway between these two and which I designate by ü. The a, too, gives us three distinct kinds,
viz : 1, a = a in English all; 2, a = a in English father; 3, a = the common flattened French a. The
Norman ar for er (travarser, sarvant, etc.,) is universal, and the strengthening of i to a most
common, e. g., shallin (shilling), Ballé (Billy), etc.
For the consonants the palatalization of the guttural mutes is one of the first and most
striking peculiarities that a stranger is likely to notice; for example, trankjille (tranquille), kjeu
(queue), vainkjeur (vainqueur).
Cf. Virginian kjar (car), gjirl (girl). Again, the interchange of
palatalized t and k as in moikjé (moitié), and the substitution of the former for simple guttural
tenuis as in tjuré (curé), or the replacing of simple dental by palatalized guttural, e. g., kjuer
(tuer).
The syncopation of a palatalized dental sonant and the development afterwards of the
palatal vowel into its corresponding semi-vowel state is found everywhere, as in Canayen
(Canadian). R frequently undergoes the same vocalization, e. g., cayottes (carottes). Prosthetic,
epenthetical and epithetical elements abound, especially for strong dentals, as in tsour (sous), tsur
(sur), i n'y a t officiers, léjart (une voiture léjart).
The morphology gives us more interesting examples of Folk-treatment, as, for example,
the article il = i, ils = iz; all adjectives in if are invariable (une femme vif); the numerals ending in
s have feminine forms (troises femmes); all new creations of verbs on English stems are thrown
into the A-conjugation, e. g., in bit-er (beat), scrép-er (scrape), slak-er (to slack), leugh-er (log) =
to roll logs together, while in the formative period of French those hybrid compounds were
distributed between the A - and I - forms, as is seen in modern French garnir (= A. S. varnian);
DOCUMENT 54 : Elliott, On a Philological Expedition to Canada
Old French gandir (= Goth. vandjan). Among the older inhabitants especially we hear j'avions,
j'étions, etc., similar to the custom of verb-usage in rural districts of France.
For the syntax I will note here only one general characteristic, that is, the universal
omission of the real negative particle in the combination ne-pas, e. g., j'pense pas (for ne pense
pas), j'aime pas, etc. This phenomenon is interesting in that it simply carries one degree further
the tendency of the classical language to make the Latin passus share the burden of negation with
its legitimate representative ne. The supplementary particle finally comes to take the place of the
primitive element altogether. Old French words and expressions are naturally found everywhere
in the greatest abundance and original French terms, with special uses peculiar to the Canadians,
are numerous.
Among the latter we may cite cailler = s'endormir2 , butin = Norman for
«clothes», mouiller (taking effect for cause) = pleuvoir, poudr-er (from poudre) = to snow a fine,
mealy snow; embarquer, débarquer, for monter, and descendre with reference to a vehicle,
mouver = «to move household effects,» etc., etc. But it is not alone old words and new uses of
modern terms that meet us here. The special formations in Canadian French are very extensive
and often serve to show how the classical language was probably built up by adding one analytic
product to another. From the Latin quasi we have the adverb casiment, and so, too, from the
modern French presque (pressum quod), the Canadian, in generalizing his adverbial categories,
produces presquement. After the manner of the early creations in the language he has no scruple
in producing a simple verb venter = «to blow» (used of wind) from the substantive vent and from
gens he strikes out engenser in the same mould which his ancestors used for the production of
similar verbal parasynthetics with the relational en.
Following again in the footsteps of the early makers of his language in adapting Latin
flexions to Gothic and German stems, he says, sidez les chars (= to run cars off the main on to the
side track of a railroad), le cheval a bolté (= «the horse bolted»), blackballer, etc., etc. It is,
however, in the province of proper names where we find to-day the most extraordinary
phenomenon, perhaps, in the whole range of creations with which the French Canadian has
enriched his native tongue. We are so accustomed to think the supply of material sufficient for
the demand in this department of word-formation and, therefore, the name-book has been closed,
that we can scarcely believe the evidence of our senses when we suddenly face a people with
whom the process of proper-name creation is in full force and of daily occurrence. Such is the
2
On lit s'en dormir dans le texte.
DOCUMENT 54 : Elliott, On a Philological Expedition to Canada
case in Canada. A single example will suffice to illustrate one phase of this procedure. Monsieur
Guérin has two sons named, respectively, Charles and Jacques. The former is a special favorite
of his father and receives the soubriquet la joie, that is, Charles Guérin dit La Joie. As said
Charles grows up he drops entirely the name of his father (Guérin) and is only known as
Monsieur Charles La Joie, his brother all the time continuing to bear the original designation of
his father's family. It thus constantly happens that two persons or two households most closely
connected in blood relationship have wholly different names, and these new soubriquets serve
again in their turn for the production of other appellations.
In the above résumé I have tried to give simply a few salient points along the line of
investigation which I have followed in collecting material for a scientific treatment of the
Canadian French language. I hope in a few months to begin to publish the results of my work. »
(p. 21)
DOCUMENT 54 : Elliott, On a Philological Expedition to Canada